Re: [GIT PULL] KVM (mostly s390) fixes for Linux 7.2-rc7
Yosry Ahmed <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.kvm,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAO9r8zP8=M9yx80SZhXXAThFbbH5wNRRnbZyy1tNF6A1JBy5FQ@mail.gmail.com> |
On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 10:43 PM Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]> wrote: > > Il sab 8 ago 2026, 00:39 Sean Christopherson <[email protected]> ha scritto: > > On Fri, Aug 07, 2026, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > I consider two weeks of wait, on a review that so far had been > > > exclusively about taste, to *be* an honest attempt to gather the next > > > round of feedback (which never came). > > > > Heh, and I was waiting for a response to Yosry's thread: > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAO9r8zODKgCcjTBK=P6BuXBBZRoOAFMeRJU8BmkWL-BCX2LoBw@mail.gmail.com > > Heh^2, "Pick your poison, I guess" was not really inviting a response. > Overall the sense of my reply to you (that is: there are two callers > so let's not overthink wrappers) applied just as much to his message; > and checking AMD vs. Intel in common code is a total no-no so I kept > the reply in one place. Aside from the code itself, I was really hoping for a better understanding of the problem, and answers from AMD/Hyper-V folks if possible. Basically: (a) Is INVLPGA intended to be used with NPT enabled to flush GVA translations on behalf of the guest? I assume the answer is yes, and something is broken. But if the answer is no, then we shouldn't be looking any further and the fix proposed by you/Sean is correct regardless. (b) Does Hyper-V use INVLPGA with NPT enabled to serve similar paravirt TLB flushes? If the answer is yes, I think it's likely there's a KVM bug and not a hardware bug, as I assume the issue would have been caught on Windows sooner. I don't know if we can realistically get an answer to this from Hyper-V folks or who to ask, but I think an answer would help. My goal is to make sure we are not papering over an existing bug in KVM's Hyper-V code. The fact that hyperv_tlb_flush is flaky with NPT=0 makes me suspect there's a bug somewhere in this code, and it might be manifesting differently for NPT=0/1.